Churches that Don't Allow Tongues and Prophecy in Meetings disobey Bible

[GreenNnice]

Then in Mark 4:11-12 Jesus makes a reference to Paul's definition of speaking in Tongues (from 1 Cor 14:2) when He speaks of "Mysteries" in Mark 4:11, pasted below./QUOTE brmicke

Hate to be the one to break it to ya, but Paul was called Saul when Jesus was around and Saul, wasn't exactly what you'e call a close friend of Jesus at the time. So there goes another part of your false teaching down the drain.

A reporter once led off a hydroplane story, about a hydro that sputtered in the pits, during the race, when was ahead, like this: 'Glub. Glub. Toil and trouble.'


Whaddya think, squirrle, make sense ? Prolly
---------------------------------------------------

And, hey, I just saw a Sears commercial and there were a whole bunch of squirrels causing havoc, some house was on fire and they were firing nuts at this dude, one nut cracked the dude right on the forehead.

Anyway, you know who I thoght of, don't ya, squirrel

 

[presidente]

First Paul is telling THEM the gifts are going to cease. It is in their future it does NOT mean when Paul,Jesus John or whoever wrote about future events that it was ALWAYS meant for OUR future.

The resurrection and the return of Christ was in the future for Paul and the Corinthians. But the completion of the canon was not in Paul's future before his death.

 

[presidente]

How are you defining a sinner? Jesus healed those who believed in Him. Jesus did not heal unbelievers. Scripture states that God does not hear sinners. John 9:31

Scripture tells us that a blind man who did not yet know who the Son of Man was said that God does not hear sinners.

 

[presidente]

Delia Knox, Walking in Stillettos - YouTube


I wonder why no one has posted Pete Cabrera Jr videos, too. They are certainly interesting.

 

[presidente]

"Cessationism is worldliness!" - Mark Driscoll - YouTube

 

[Cobus]

How censational is SALVATION? If the BIGGEST PEACE on this planet is IN CHRIST JESUS, how wonderful would that peace be? And if God makes the lame walk, how wonderful is that? And if Angus Buchan pray for a dead girl on his farm and she comes alive, how wonderful is that?

If God gives prohecy to the Zulus and the Xhosa through His evangelists, in their own tongue, hw great is that? Specially if the evangelist did not know Xhosa or Zulu. How great if God heals a Venda from arthrites and speaks the LOVE MESSAGE in his own language. Telling that man EXACTLY what to do as the evangelist would not stay another day... And the same evangelist has NEVER spoken Tshivenda before.

How wonderful is it when ONE WHITE MAN goes to Vendaland, and turn hundreds of Venda-land people to God. Away from their Sangomas and evil forefather spirit worshipping? And whenever God wants to adress them, HE DOES SO IN THEIR OWN LANGUAGE... God speaks ALL languages the best. HE IS GOD, HE MADE EVERY LANGUAGE HIMSLEF!

IF God speaks through a person, GOD CAN REALLY LAY IT ON. His Word and HIS PROHECY for every person or group will BE TOLD IF HE WANTS IT TOLD! The only reason the ROCKS does not talk, is because GOD CHOSE PEOPLE TO DO SO! Even though God uses and chose people, it is STILL HIM TALKING NOT THEM!

What would a rock say? Well the ones that Jesus refred too would have said.... HOSSANAH, GREAT IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!..... And they would not have talked they woudl have SHOUTED IT OUT LOUD... I think there would not have been a Jesus-crucifiction then... All would have ran from the city.

Oh God is way more powerful that what most people think. And in God's CHURCH, EVERY THING THAT HAPPENS THERE, HE IS IN CONTROL. God HIMSELF maintains and runs the Church. Jesus is the head, and the Body follows. The clay does not tell the potter, the potter forms the clay.

And no man, no woman, and no evil spirit can change God at WORK...

 

[SarahM777]

The resurrection and the return of Christ was in the future for Paul and the Corinthians. But the completion of the canon was not in Paul's future before his death.

Paul died before John did. John wrote the last book of the Bible.

 

[SarahM777]

"Cessationism is worldliness!" - Mark Driscoll - YouTube

So which point are you trying to prove with Driscoll? The man does have some issues that would point to the fact he is not what he tries to say what he is.

 

[presidente]

So which point are you trying to prove with Driscoll? The man does have some issues that would point to the fact he is not what he tries to say what he is.

I was referring to the argument rather than the person.

 

[SarahM777]

Hey..just saying hello Sarah...and boy are you a faithful and even tempered person...ok enuf of the smooth flatteries, sowy theres a person you talk to that not that long ago said the brownsville stuff was authentic...ive been around awhile too now dont get me wrong we all have prolly fallen into error...well i sure have...but the point here is this.....what the heck
is the difference between a charismatic/pente and the rest of the pack? whats so great about these gifts "if" they do us no good? give us no protection from the junk? are we to get a big fat spirit with the same big dumb brain? ok maybe thats just bunk on my part

Abiding,if you knew me as a kid you would know that is a work of God. (Not so even tempered as a kid)

I got caught into too so...

And that is the most ironic part of all. It's like what is wrong with this picture. How is it that people that do not believe the gifts continued catch those people long before the people who say the gifts continued and are suppose to have many that have the gift of discernment?

 

[SarahM777]

I was referring to the argument rather than the person.

UMMM Interesting that you would use a man who very well is false to prove your point. If the man is false to begin with then how do you know that this also is not false?

 

[presidente]

UMMM Interesting that you would use a man who very well is false to prove your point. If the man is false to begin with then how do you know that this also is not false?

Why would you say he is 'false'? He believes in Christ. I may not agree with his ecclesiology, and some people don't like his continual focus on preaching on aspects of sexuality. But based on what do you say he is 'false.'

 

[SarahM777]

Why would you say he is 'false'? He believes in Christ. I may not agree with his ecclesiology, and some people don't like his continual focus on preaching on aspects of sexuality. But based on what do you say he is 'false.'

Mormons believe in Christ but they themselves do not believe in the SAME Christ. His fruits for one point to the fact he is either false or a very very carnal Christian. He uses crude language which is not becoming a believer. Paul is very clear on that

Ephesians 5


1 Follow God’s example, therefore, as dearly loved children 2 and walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
3 But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. 4 Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving. 5 For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.[a] 6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. 7 Therefore do not be partners with them.




[h=1]Conduct unworthy of the pulpit[/h]
[h=1]A characteristic of Mark Driscoll’s ministry is the large range of provocative t-shirts he has worn when preaching in Mars Hill Church. Examples include:
[/h][h=2]Jesus watches you download porn[/h][h=1]From Driscoll’s sermon: ‘The T-shirt I’m wearing is an example of drag queen Jesus. You’ll notice he has very long hair, beautiful curly, and a nice feature is a bit of rouse on his cheeks; he didn’t look like that. And it also says that Jesus watches you download porn which is theologically correct and actually true. ‘ There is much laughter from the audience, and Driscoll smiles and chuckles in apparent delight at his joke. He then continues, revealing what is really in his heart. He says, ‘This is one of my favourite t-shirts, actually.’




[/h][h=2]Jesus is my homeboy[/h]According to Driscoll the T-shirt is worn by Madonna, Pamela Anderson, Ben Affleck, Ashton Kutcher and Brad Pitt.


[h=2]Mark Driscoll’s undignified conduct[/h]
The main characteristic of Driscoll’s T-shirt ministry is the flippant and irreverent nature of the message. Jesus Christ is presented as a homeboy, a disc jockey, a revolutionary, someone who likes Klondike bars, someone who watches members of his church download porn.
Driscoll’s T-shirt ministry is in direct contradiction to the teaching of Scripture. Apostle Paul commanded young Timothy:
“Be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation (conduct), in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity” (1 Timothy 4.12).
A church leader is to be an example in both word (doctrine) and conduct. What example in conduct is Mark Driscoll, leader of Mars Hill Church? Is it appropriate for a minister of the Church of Jesus Christ to wear irreverent and flippant T-shirts when preaching God’s Word in God’s House? Driscoll just announced on his blog that “in conjunction with each sermon” this month he will be “modeling a goofy Jesus t-shirt to provide a few additional laughs.” [hat tip Jesus Politics]
Godliness and dignified conduct
Scripture is clear that all Christian people should be dignified in behaviour and conduct. The apostle Paul writes to Timothy that prayers and petitions and thanksgiving should be made on behalf of all men “in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour” (1 Timothy 2.1-3). Scripture is clear that love of God (godliness) and dignified conduct go together.

http://www.driscollcontroversy.com/?page_id=289

The site shows the T-shirts.




[h=1]

​

[/h]

 

[SarahM777]

THE CUSSING PASTOR​

Pastor Mark Driscoll, founder of Mars Hill Church, Seattle Washington is highly regarded in evangelical circles. Pastor Driscoll sometimes uses profanity from the pulpit and has become known for his crude stand-up comic style preaching. The self-described theological conservative and cultural liberal has been accused of trading reverence for relevance. His congregants, most of whom are young people, take delight in hearing sermons laced with crudity. Not surprisingly, early on in his ministry one of his friends referred to him as “the cussing pastor.” Today he’s criticized for more than cussing; he has been accused of making “disgusting comments” of “dirty talk” and turning Bible verses into punch lines for crude jokes.​

Mark Driscoll holds a Master of Arts degree in exegetical theology from Western Seminary so he must know that James 3:9-10 says, “bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.”​

Critics of the superstar pastor say that he’s coarsening the hearts and minds of generation Y. Here’s an example from Pastor Driscoll writing about the biblical character of Queen Esther:​

She grows up in a very lukewarm religious home as an orphan raised by her cousin. Beautiful, she allows men to tend to her needs and make her decisions. Her behavior is sinful and she spends around a year in the spa getting dolled up to lose her virginity with the pagan king like hundreds of other women. She performs so well that he chooses her as his favorite. Today, her story would be, a beautiful young woman living in a major city allows men to cater to her needs, undergoes lots of beauty treatment to look her best, and lands a really rich guy whom she meets on The Bachelor and wows with an amazing night in bed. She’s simply a person without any character until her own neck is on the line, and then we see her rise up to save the life of her people when she is converted to a real faith in God. (Source)​

This is disturbing on so many levels. Because space does not allow further comment, those who wish a complete analysis of Driscoll’s disgraceful teaching on Esther read Mark Driscoll’s Bizarre World of Queen Esther the “Bachelorette”

Marsha West -- Profane preachers contribute to killing the conscience

Need anyone say more? ​

 

[zone]

Why would you say he is 'false'? He believes in Christ. I may not agree with his ecclesiology, and some people don't like his continual focus on preaching on aspects of sexuality. But based on what do you say he is 'false.'

A Plea to Mark Driscoll
1517: A Plea to Mark Driscoll < click

presidente, once someone proclaims that God has spoken to them personally and audibly, particularly a 'leader', especially the assertion God called them to LEAD.....they're in a whole new league.

the problem has now fallen onto the SHEEP - do they listen to this man's voice? or not.

immediately everything Person A says concerning The Lord; the church; Person A's calling must be examined. do you not agree?

this is pretty serious - God is either:

1) really speaking directly to Person A, and we need to leave everything else we are doing and devote ourselves to every word that proceeds from that leader (to whom God is speaking)

2) did not speak directly to Person A. (person a is deceived and/or deceiving).

how is it we don't yet understand that it falls on US to decide? we have to. they have left us no choice.

 

[SarahM777]

Cont

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]TAKEN TO THE WOOD SHED​

[/FONT]​

​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Boyce College professor Heath Lambert wrote an extensive book review of the New York Times best-selling book by Pastor Mark and his wife, Grace,Real Marriage: The Truth About Sex, Friendship, and Life Together, for the Journal of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Lambert lamented:​

[/FONT]​

​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Make no mistake: men and women will be introduced to pornography because of this book. For almost my entire ministry I have been talking to at least one person a week who struggles with pornography. I do not live in some sheltered ministry context away from people with perverse struggles. As true as that is, the Driscolls taught me a lot about pornography I wish I never knew. The Driscolls introduce their readers to the titles of pornographic books, magazines, and videos; they provide technical names for specific kinds of pornographic films; they list the names of celebri¬ties who have starred in pornography; they even provide web addresses where readers can meet people for sex. As I look back on that sentence I am overwhelmed that a Christian minister could be so irresponsible. I can tell you for an absolute fact that there are young men and women all across the country who will read Real Marriage, have their interest piqued by some of the details the Driscolls provide, will turn to Google for a search on those things, and will not come up for air again for hours—perhaps months and years. If you or someone you love struggles with pornography the Driscolls’ book will do serious damage. (Source)

Need more? Or is it becoming quite clear?​

[/FONT]​

​

 

[SarahM777]

It just boggles the mind that one can disregard what the Lord said about sexual immorality and call Driscoll a man of God when the Lord is so very painfully clear about about staying away from sexual immorality.

 

[zone]

It just boggles the mind that one can disregard what the Lord said about sexual immorality and call Driscoll a man of God when the Lord is so very painfully clear about about staying away from sexual immorality.

this brings to mind a whole other issue...something i heard Phil Johnson cover when he was examining the so-called emergent church movement.

that's the movement that "emerged" out of the Youth Group generation.

for some reason, the idea apparently was : the kids would be bored, or not get anything out of the assembly where the Word is taught; prayers and hymns.

or that they would be a distraction (not taught to behave and reverent before God in church).

and (more understandably), the youth groups' other activities would be a way to keep them off the streets or influenced by the world. fair enough.

so off they go to be pretty much entertained. Phil's survey was pretty hard to refute - the thesis being that the 'leaders' (rob bell; driscoll et al) were kids who had been catered to as youths - things had to be hip & cool, and not too demanding. if the kids had ideas of their own, well - if you want to keep them happy and interested, you have to incorporate their stuff - aka: no absolute truth, some of the world mixed in is supposedly a good thing.

so the result was a whole generation of now culturally "relevant" "leaders" who appealed to the spoiled youth group kids, cuz that's what they had (or wanted to have).

the need to be continually entertained seems to just have kept growing.
phil's audio lectures on it are quite good.
anyway...off topic but you get the idea.

turns out it's never a good idea to separate the church into different groups - especially kids vs adults. what are they being taught?
who is teaching them?
dunno.

 

[SarahM777]

this brings to mind a whole other issue...something i heard Phil Johnson cover when he was examining the so-called emergent church movement.

that's the movement that "emerged" out of the Youth Group generation.

for some reason, the idea apparently was : the kids would be bored, or not get anything out of the assembly where the Word is taught; prayers and hymns.

or that they would be a distraction (not taught to behave and reverent before God in church).

and (more understandably), the youth groups' other activities would be a way to keep them off the streets or influenced by the world. fair enough.

so off they go to be pretty much entertained. Phil's survey was pretty hard to refute - the thesis being that the 'leaders' (rob bell; driscoll et al) were kids who had been catered to as youths - things had to be hip & cool, and not too demanding. if the kids had ideas of their own, well - if you want to keep them happy and interested, you have to incorporate their stuff - aka: no absolute truth, some of the world mixed in is supposedly a good thing.

so the result was a whole generation of now culturally "relevant" "leaders" who appealed to the spoiled youth group kids, cuz that's what they had (or wanted to have).

the need to be continually entertained seems to just have kept growing.
phil's audio lectures on it are quite good.
anyway...off topic but you get the idea.

turns out it's never a good idea to separate the church into different groups - especially kids vs adults. what are they being taught?
who is teaching them?
dunno.

Actually it does go to the heart of the whole thing. It goes right back to the conundrum. If tongues and the rest of the gifts continued,how is it that those who say the gifts ceased pick up the false prophets faster,by comparing what they say and do against God's written as opposed to those who say they have the gifts but miss even the most obvious of false prophets and teachers? How are they to even see when the prophet or teacher is extremely subtle? Why is the Lord NOT warning them of these things? The whole thing does not seem to make any sense what so ever. Where in any of this is the gift of discernment?

 

[BradC]

you're making that up because you have to now.
they hid because they heard the sound of Him walking in the garden....then He called to them AFTER they hid: WHERE ARE YOU.

He was NOT convicting them of their disobedience BEFORE that and the bible doesn't say it. why do you ADD to what it says.

it's a CLEAR representation of HOW God is with us - He knew where they were, and what they had done - He wanted them to confess to Him.

i already showed you the small still voice isn't what you said it is. go read the jewish interpretations of the hebrew.
it's a sound, not a voice. but hey - if you want to claim you're hearing God's voice directly have at it.

8 They heard the voice of Adonai, God, walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, so the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence ofAdonai, God, among the trees in the garden. 9 Adonai, God, called to the man, “Where are you?” 10 He answered, “I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, so I hid myself.”

God's presence walking in the garden represented everything he had previously spoke to Adam and his wife that had become part of their conscience that was conscious of God only. When Adam had transgressed by eating what was prohibited, his eyes were opened to his wife and his own nakedness (self consciousness, realization of self or self awareness) and they sewed fig leaves to cover themselves with an apron (a false covering). Fear became his response to the voice and sound of God's presence (all that God had taught him) and they hid themselves among the trees from the presence of the Lord. Adam knew what he had done self consciously and all it took was the voice and sound of God's presence to convict him causing him to react through fear and hide himself from God's presence. Just wording it this way upsets some people and they accuse you of adding to the scripture, when in reality you have come to that understanding by studying that account. I won't go into it but the word for 'voice' comes from the same root word that means to 'call aloud'. There is a definite sound associated with the word 'voice' and it was unmistakable as to who it was coming from. We can liken that sound voice as to John 10:3-5.

3 The watchman opens the door for this man, and the sheep listen to his voice andheed it; and he calls his own sheep by name and brings (leads) them out.
4 When he has brought his own sheep outside, he walks on before them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice.
5 They will never [on any account] follow a stranger, but will run away from him because they do not know the voice of strangers or recognize their call.

Then comes the question, 'Why did Eve, the woman, listen to the voice of the serpent when she already had God's voice on the issue as to what she should do concerning that tree in the midst of the garden? What was it that caught her eye and got her to desire the wisdom of that tree and to partake of its fruit? She was deceived into believing that she could have independent knowledge that was being kept from her and her husband through that tree. After they ate they got the knowledge of good and evil but it was self knowledge oriented to the earthy wisdom of self realization bringing in the sin of independence and separation from God. It's actually astonishing that they still knew the voice of God that was presented in the cool of the day. What was different was how they were oriented to that voice. Before they were perfectly one with God who had created and covered them in his image and likeness, but now they had been uncovered and were independent through self consciousness and self awareness in their nakedness having been stripped of being only God conscious. They had gone from being one with God to only being aware of the voice and sound of God's presence having covered themselves with the false covering of fig leaves that were later replaced by God when he covered them with coats of skin in Gen 3:21 and placed them outside the garden.